User talk:BC1278/sandbox/Robinhood

I have a WP: COI as a paid consultant to Robinhood. As instructed by the Contact Us page's instructions for article subjects to contact Wikipedia to make requests regarding articles that are "incomplete, inaccurate, or biased," I would like to request that an independent editor review the following proposed edits. User: BC1278 helped me prepare this request, as a paid consultant.

1. In lead, change "The company offers the Robinhood smartphone mobile app, which allows individuals to invest in publicly traded companies and exchange-traded funds listed on U.S. stock exchanges without paying a commission "

to: "The company offers a mobile app and website that allows people to invest in publicly traded companies listed on U.S. stock exchanges, exchange-traded funds, options and cryptocurrencies without paying a commission."

Note: This clarifies that service is available on both the web and through an app, and that the basic services is not limited to the U.S. stock exchange, but also includes options, cyrptocurriences and ETFs. There are separate stories in reliable sources as these new product offerings rolled out (after massive investments.) As is stands, the article is misleading/incomplete.

2. Move in lead, the following from the intro to the second paragraph of "Operations" section:

The firm is a FINRA-approved broker-dealer, registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and is a member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation.

Note: This type of detail is more appropriate for the body of the article than the lead.

3. Move in lead, "The company's main source of revenue comes from interest earned on customers' cash balances and margin lending.

to "History" section, in proper chronological order for 2017, as: "The company's main source of revenue in February 2017 came from interest earned on customers' cash balances and margin lending. It later added a "Gold" subscription for a monthly fee, allowing people to borrow money for margin buying. Bloomberg News reported in October 2018 that Robinhood receives almost half of its revenue from payment for order flow.

Note: this statement about interest being the primary source of revenue was true in February 2017, but isn't true anymore, which is why it's best in the History section, rather than the lead. I also added the date and made it past tense to further clarify. I added the additional sources of revenue that year since people will wonder how a free service makes money.

I also suggest moving the new sentence about order flow, above, from the "Controversy" section to here as it describes another way how the company makes money.

4. Edit, in lead, the following: "Prior to 2019, the company's primary source of revenue was from payment for order flow. However, in a 2018 statement the company announced it was ending this form of revenue generation by developing its own in-house clearing agency.

to: "The company said in October 2018 it had started processing trades through its own clearing agency. By no longer paying fees to an outside firm, it increased profitability." "

and Move it to the proper place in History, in chronological order for.

Note: Company website is not a reliable source. Changed the source to a press account. Revised the statement so it is accurate, as per the reiable source. Neither the press account nor the website says anything about revenue from order flow.

5. Delete in lead: "but in May 2019, reports from Bloomberg and other outlets publicized Robinhood’s pursuit of an additional $200 million in funding, which could value the company in the $7 billion to $10 billion range.

Note: Speculative. Violates WP: CrystalBall

6. Delete in lead: "In September 2018, the company's co-founders announced plans to take the company public in 2019. "

Note: Violates WP: CrystalBall.

7. Delete in lead:  "The app has gone under scrutiny for establishing a checking account that offers high interest rates as it is not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.  "

Note: There is a full accounting of this series of events in the History section. It is an historical event, rather than a summary of the company appropriate for the lead. It's another event in its history, worth including in chronological order. Furthermore, the current statement in the lead is inaccurate. The checking account product never launched. There was just an announcement. Also, the company never said the product would be protected by the FDIC. It said it would be protected by the SIPC, but regulators said no such approval had been given yet. Following regulatory concerns, the company first changed its characterization of the announced product to a "cash account", then closed the waiting list altogether. All this is correctly summarized already in History, but is inaccurate or incomplete in the lead.

8. Change in History: "In December 2013 Robinhood launched out of stealth on the crowdsourced technology news website Hacker News, leading to articles about the company in TechCrunch, PandoDaily, VentureBeat, TheStreet and others.  "

to: "Robinhood launched out of stealth in December 2013 and announced an initial $3 million in seed funding.”

Note: It is bad practice to name sources unless they represent opinion/analysis. That is not the case here. This is just fact-based reporting. It's also incorrect that the app launched "on Hacker New" -- the app has nothing to do with Hacker News. Hacker News published a Reddit leak of the sign-up page link when the app was in beta, according to the TechCrunch source - it is unrelated to the company. Also, one good source is enough. No need to cite four sources here.

9. Delete in History: Initially the firm had a waiting list, and in under 30 days there were 100,000 signups.

Note: Twitter is not a reliable source. WP: RS

10. Delete in History In mid-to-late February 2014, co-founders Baiju Bhatt and Vladimir Tenev were on CNBC and Bloomberg TV.

Note: Routine media appearance not relevant to history of company. WP: NOTNEWS

BC1278 (talk) 19:12, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

SUBMIT NEXT GROUP as a separate batch.

11. Edit the following sentence: "In December 2013 Robinhood launched out of stealth and announced an initial $3 million in seed funding. "

to read: "In December 2013 Robinhood came out of stealth and launched a private beta. It also announced an initial $3 million in seed funding.

Note: the app was not open to the public at this point, so it's inaccurate to say it "launched."

12. Edit: As of January 2015, 80% of the firm's customers belonged to the demographic "millennials" (people between the ages 18 and 29) and the average customer age was 26. Fifty percent of users who have made a trade use the app daily and 90% come back to the app weekly.

to "While in private beta, fifty percent of users who made a trade used the app daily and 90% came back to the app weekly. As of January 2015, while still in private beta, 80% of the firm's customers belonged to the demographic "millennials" (people between the ages 18 and 29) and the average customer age was 26.

and, these two sentences can be made the second and third sentence of the previous sentence, about launching out of stealth.

Note: As currently phrased, the sentence about 2014 is after the sentence about 2015 and reads as though it is 2015 data. But it is actually 2014 data. So I propose flipping the two sentences of the previous paragraph. It's also a good idea to specify these numbers were in private beta, before the official launch.

13. Edit in History:: "By September 2014, the waiting list had reached 500,000 people. In March 2015, the company announced those still on the waitlist could create accounts and any U.S. residents, 18 and older, could apply for an account. "

to: "The app officially launched no commission trading in March 2015, after having amassed a wait list of 800,000 people. "

and Move to proper chronological order (down one paragraph.)

Note: This request includes deleting the first sentence. It is much clearer in the proposed language that this is the date when the product actually launched. And there's no need to mention the previous wait list number in September 2014, pre-launch, if the wait list number at launch in March 2015 is noted.

14. Add in History::

"As of January 2018, 78% of the firm's customers belonged to the demographic "millennials" (people between the ages of 23 and 38) and the average customer age was 31. "

and place in chronological order.

Note: This updates the 2015 information from earlier in the article.

15. In History, add the missing word "next" to:

On January 25, 2018, the company announced a waitlist... The next month, Robinhood began offering commission-free trading of Bitcoin and Ethereum to users in California, Massachusetts, Missouri, and Montana

Note: "Next" seems to be an unintentionally omitted word. The sentence doesn't make sense without it.

16. In History, add after: "In May 2018, Robinhood expanded its Crypto trading platform to Wisconsin and New Mexico." "Robinhood's crypto trading platform was available in 30 states, as of June 2019. "

Note: this significantly updates the information from the previous sentence.

17. In History, after: By February 2018, Robinhood had 3 million user accounts, around the same number as the online broker E-Trade.....

add: “Robinhood had grown to 6 million accounts, as of October 2018. '

Note: Significant change in size of business.

18. In History change: "In June 2018, it was reported that the company was in talks to obtain a US banking license, with a spokesperson from the company claiming the company was in "constructive" talks with the U.S. OCC."

to: "In June 2018, it was reported that the company was in talks to obtain a U.S. banking license, but Robinhood declined to comment on the matter."

Same source.

Note: the source does not say a spokesperson from the company commented. It says a person familiar with the matter commented - that could be a regulator, a leak or anyone else. All the company said was that it had no comment.

19. In History, change date from "January 2019" to "December 2018" in this sentence:

"In January 2019 the wait list and sign up page were removed from the app."

Note: While the date of the source is January 2019, the tweet the company is reporting on is dated December 24 2018.

20. Move and edit:

"In September 2018, Seeking Alpha published a scathing critique of the Robinhood platform, criticizing its use of payment for order flow as the company's primary source of funding. "

a) Move to chronological order in History, for September 2018.

Note: Almost always preferable not to separate out criticism or controversy from being integrated into the main History in order to avoid NPOV and Undue issues. See the essay Criticism

b) Delete the word "scathing."

Note: Characterization of criticism as "scathing" violates WP: NPOV. This is the editor's personal assessment of the article, not information in the article.

c) Change the word "funding" to "revenue".

Note: the article reports rebate from order flow as revenue, not funding. Funding means capital raised from investors, not a source of revenue.

Taken together, the new proposed sentence is:

"In September 2018, Seeking Alpha published a critique of the Robinhood platforms' use of payment for order flow as the company's primary source of revenue. "

21. Move to end of the existing paragraph in History on revenue sources for Robinhood that starts with: "The company's main source of revenue in 2017..."

"Bloomberg News reported in October 2018 that Robinhood receives almost half of its revenue from payment for order flow. "

Note: There is already a section above this sentence about how the company makes money. This info goes best there, as they are about the same thing. This is also part of Request # 4.

22. Delete:

"The company later confirmed this on its corporate website when asked by CNBC. "

Note: The CNBC video does not say Robinhood confirmed it made half its revenue from order flow. In fact, it say the company would not confirm how much money it makes from order flow. The video only says the company, on its website, confirmed it executes trades through market makers and earns revenue from order flow rebates. Since there's also a sentence criticizing the practice and another sentence talking about how much money the company is said to make from the practice, a third sentence just confirming the company says it make money from order flow (but not how much) seems superfluous.

BC1278 (talk) 18:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)BC1278